DXO Lens Modules

DXO have published an article detailing how their lens modules are made. Makes interesting reading.


Ian

IanYorke said:

DXO have published an article detailing how their lens modules are made. Makes interesting reading.

https://www.dxo.com/news/celebratin...ntent=2nd&mc_cid=82b60535f5&mc_eid=7d095fc7e3

Click to expand...

Quite a great advertisement or PR campaign! Versus Lightroom and Capture One is dramatic, but in practice an expert Lightroom user can achieve results comparable to DxO.

I've noticed that ORF/RW2 images from M43 cameras are often vastly improved by PhotoLab, whereas sometimes it's hard to improve upon Fuji X out-of-camera JPEGs.

Recently, I saw that the lower priced "kit" lens (XF 16-50/2.8-4.8) was sharper than the higher priced "pro" lens (XF 16-55/2.8 ii) after treatment with DxO lens modules.

I wonder if DxO ever issues revisions to lens modules?

CAcreeks said:

IanYorke said:

DXO have published an article detailing how their lens modules are made. Makes interesting reading.

https://www.dxo.com/news/celebratin...ntent=2nd&mc_cid=82b60535f5&mc_eid=7d095fc7e3

Click to expand...

Quite a great advertisement or PR campaign! Versus Lightroom and Capture One is dramatic, but in practice an expert Lightroom user can achieve results comparable to DxO.

Click to expand...

Often, it’s simply impossible for Adobe or C1 to match DxO’s results, as they don’t render the full image from wide angle zoom lenses. It simply makes no difference how expert the user is. They, particularly C1, also fail to extract all the detail from noisier images.

CAcreeks said:

I've noticed that ORF/RW2 images from M43 cameras are often vastly improved by PhotoLab, whereas sometimes it's hard to improve upon Fuji X out-of-camera JPEGs.

Recently, I saw that the lower priced "kit" lens (XF 16-50/2.8-4.8) was sharper than the higher priced "pro" lens (XF 16-55/2.8 ii) after treatment with DxO lens modules.

I wonder if DxO ever issues revisions to lens modules?

Click to expand...

Yes, but it’s very rare.

But there’s a different problem sometimes, when the camera exif data doesn’t make clear which of several possible lenses was in use. That tends to happen when a manufacturer has had two or three generations of lenses covering the same focal kength range and aperture. The first gen probably doesn’t provide any detail about which model it was; only the later variants add the extra detail. DxO can then end up using the wrong optics module.

CAcreeks said:

IanYorke said:

DXO have published an article detailing how their lens modules are made. Makes interesting reading.

https://www.dxo.com/news/celebratin...ntent=2nd&mc_cid=82b60535f5&mc_eid=7d095fc7e3

Click to expand...

Quite a great advertisement or PR campaign! Versus Lightroom and Capture One is dramatic, but in practice an expert Lightroom user can achieve results comparable to DxO

Click to expand...

Yes, but I still found the details of what they actually do to produce the modules interesting.

Ian

CAcreeks said:

... Versus Lightroom and Capture One is dramatic, but in practice an expert Lightroom user can achieve results comparable to DxO.

Click to expand...

I don't think those are well chosen DxO sharpening examples. They show distinct halos (dark or light) on many high contrast edges. The example of the guy on a mountaintop is really bad. I personally avoid taking sharpening that far with PhotoLab.

Photo AI did a better job working just from the RGB screen grab.


Screen grab of unsharpened original


Screen grab of DxO sharpening example


Unsharpened original sharpened with Photo AI instead

Its interesting but with all the in-depth profiling i'm not convinced as photolab can often over sharpen the image with the defaults. This is often especially obvious with foliage. So im not 100% convinced what they do is really any better than other software that can often give more natural defaults.

I think part of the problem is that the lens sharpness defaults combined with the deepprime xd contributes to the over sharpness.

So on one hand i have no complaints in getting a nice sharp detailed image i now have to turn settings down so it doesnt look over sharpened!

This doesnt happen on every image though which is a bit frustrating so yea a mixed bag really.

I also find that vignette correction can be totally too strong on defaults on some camera lens combos. Not figured out why but might be because camera is baking in corrections in raw on some lenses..

Anyway, here is an image with default lens and vignette correction. Pretty obvious the vignette correction is wrong.


edges too bright from default vignette correction

2nd image i think is over sharpened using defaults. Its not the worst example, i have seen much, much worse but hard to go back and find them once processed.


Oversharp defaults?

I'm not hear to bash dxo, i can get great results but also some dubious results..

CAcreeks said:

Recently, I saw that the lower priced "kit" lens (XF 16-50/2.8-4.8) was sharper than the higher priced "pro" lens (XF 16-55/2.8 ii) after treatment with DxO lens modules.

Click to expand...

As the article quotes,

• “The more ‘average’ your camera and lenses, the bigger the improvement.”
  --Digital Camera World

I do wonder about sample variation, though. Alluded to once.

CAcreeks said:

IanYorke said:

DXO have published an article detailing how their lens modules are made. Makes interesting reading.

https://www.dxo.com/news/celebratin...ntent=2nd&mc_cid=82b60535f5&mc_eid=7d095fc7e3

Click to expand...

Quite a great advertisement or PR campaign! Versus Lightroom and Capture One is dramatic, but in practice an expert Lightroom user can achieve results comparable to DxO.

I've noticed that ORF/RW2 images from M43 cameras are often vastly improved by PhotoLab, whereas sometimes it's hard to improve upon Fuji X out-of-camera JPEGs.

Recently, I saw that the lower priced "kit" lens (XF 16-50/2.8-4.8) was sharper than the higher priced "pro" lens (XF 16-55/2.8 ii) after treatment with DxO lens modules.

I wonder if DxO ever issues revisions to lens modules?

Click to expand...

Yes, it was a day and night difference with the Fuji 16-55.

I was surprised that they supported the Viltrox 20/2.8 on my Z7. Their lens profiles are excellent.

But they have to work on their colors and manipulation of colors. Not on the same level as C1, LRc or darktable.

CAcreeks said:

CAcreeks said:

Recently, I saw that the lower priced "kit" lens (XF 16-50/2.8-4.8) was sharper than the higher priced "pro" lens (XF 16-55/2.8 ii) after treatment with DxO lens modules.

Click to expand...

As the article quotes,

• “The more ‘average’ your camera and lenses, the bigger the improvement.”
  --Digital Camera World

I do wonder about sample variation, though. Alluded to once.

Click to expand...

They probably test more than one. They can also, almost certainly, test to see if a lens is properly aligned, and adjust it if not.

Pixel8888 said:

CAcreeks said:

IanYorke said:

DXO have published an article detailing how their lens modules are made. Makes interesting reading.

https://www.dxo.com/news/celebratin...ntent=2nd&mc_cid=82b60535f5&mc_eid=7d095fc7e3

Click to expand...

Quite a great advertisement or PR campaign! Versus Lightroom and Capture One is dramatic, but in practice an expert Lightroom user can achieve results comparable to DxO.

I've noticed that ORF/RW2 images from M43 cameras are often vastly improved by PhotoLab, whereas sometimes it's hard to improve upon Fuji X out-of-camera JPEGs.

Recently, I saw that the lower priced "kit" lens (XF 16-50/2.8-4.8) was sharper than the higher priced "pro" lens (XF 16-55/2.8 ii) after treatment with DxO lens modules.

I wonder if DxO ever issues revisions to lens modules?

Click to expand...

Yes, it was a day and night difference with the Fuji 16-55.

I was surprised that they supported the Viltrox 20/2.8 on my Z7. Their lens profiles are excellent.

But they have to work on their colors and manipulation of colors. Not on the same level as C1, LRc or darktable.

Click to expand...

Is that true even with FilmPack?

Digital Nigel said:

Pixel8888 said:

CAcreeks said:

IanYorke said:

DXO have published an article detailing how their lens modules are made. Makes interesting reading.

https://www.dxo.com/news/celebratin...ntent=2nd&mc_cid=82b60535f5&mc_eid=7d095fc7e3

Click to expand...

Quite a great advertisement or PR campaign! Versus Lightroom and Capture One is dramatic, but in practice an expert Lightroom user can achieve results comparable to DxO.

I've noticed that ORF/RW2 images from M43 cameras are often vastly improved by PhotoLab, whereas sometimes it's hard to improve upon Fuji X out-of-camera JPEGs.

Recently, I saw that the lower priced "kit" lens (XF 16-50/2.8-4.8) was sharper than the higher priced "pro" lens (XF 16-55/2.8 ii) after treatment with DxO lens modules.

I wonder if DxO ever issues revisions to lens modules?

Click to expand...

Yes, it was a day and night difference with the Fuji 16-55.

I was surprised that they supported the Viltrox 20/2.8 on my Z7. Their lens profiles are excellent.

But they have to work on their colors and manipulation of colors. Not on the same level as C1, LRc or darktable.

Click to expand...

Is that true even with FilmPack?

Click to expand...

I bougt the film pack for the luma range mask and additional contrast slider. I am not so convinced with these film emulations. Others might love them.

I think the best one I have used so far, are Haldclut Luts with darktable. Velvia 100 gen and Kodachrome 64 gen. I also use the older free version of Nik Tools, they are quite good.

Pixel8888 said:

Digital Nigel said:

Pixel8888 said:

CAcreeks said:

IanYorke said:

DXO have published an article detailing how their lens modules are made. Makes interesting reading.

https://www.dxo.com/news/celebratin...ntent=2nd&mc_cid=82b60535f5&mc_eid=7d095fc7e3

Click to expand...

Quite a great advertisement or PR campaign! Versus Lightroom and Capture One is dramatic, but in practice an expert Lightroom user can achieve results comparable to DxO.

I've noticed that ORF/RW2 images from M43 cameras are often vastly improved by PhotoLab, whereas sometimes it's hard to improve upon Fuji X out-of-camera JPEGs.

Recently, I saw that the lower priced "kit" lens (XF 16-50/2.8-4.8) was sharper than the higher priced "pro" lens (XF 16-55/2.8 ii) after treatment with DxO lens modules.

I wonder if DxO ever issues revisions to lens modules?

Click to expand...

Yes, it was a day and night difference with the Fuji 16-55.

I was surprised that they supported the Viltrox 20/2.8 on my Z7. Their lens profiles are excellent.

But they have to work on their colors and manipulation of colors. Not on the same level as C1, LRc or darktable.

Click to expand...

Is that true even with FilmPack?

Click to expand...

I bougt the film pack for the luma range mask and additional contrast slider. I am not so convinced with these film emulations. Others might love them.

Click to expand...

FP brings a number of other controls that are nothing to do with film emulation.

Pixel8888 said:

I think the best one I have used so far, are Haldclut Luts with darktable. Velvia 100 gen and Kodachrome 64 gen. I also use the older free version of Nik Tools, they are quite good.

Click to expand...

ishwanu said:

CAcreeks said:

... Versus Lightroom and Capture One is dramatic, but in practice an expert Lightroom user can achieve results comparable to DxO.

Click to expand...

I don't think those are well chosen DxO sharpening examples. They show distinct halos (dark or light) on many high contrast edges. The example of the guy on a mountaintop is really bad. I personally avoid taking sharpening that far with PhotoLab.

Photo AI did a better job working just from the RGB screen grab.


Screen grab of unsharpened original


Screen grab of DxO sharpening example


Unsharpened original sharpened with Photo AI instead

Click to expand...

Sharpening isn't PhotoLab's strength - for that there's Nik Sharpener - and in this case you're not working on RAW files. For extracting max detail from RAW files, particularly noisy ones and ones shot with lenses that need help, PhotoLab/PureRAW still can't be beat.

--
Event professional for 20+ years, travel & landscape enthusiast for 30+, stills-only.

maltmoose said:

Its interesting but with all the in-depth profiling i'm not convinced as photolab can often over sharpen the image with the defaults. This is often especially obvious with foliage. So im not 100% convinced what they do is really any better than other software that can often give more natural defaults.

I think part of the problem is that the lens sharpness defaults combined with the deepprime xd contributes to the over sharpness.

Click to expand...

You may be working with an older version. I found that the combination of Lens Sharpness with DeepPRIME XD tended to yield blotchy skin tones with PhotoLab 6 Elite. This was easy to ameliorate by simply dialing down the intensity of Lens Sharpness by 50% (Global: +0.50).

But now, with DeepPRIME XD2s and the revamped Lens Sharpness engine in PhotoLab 8, the default results are fantastic. IMHO, DP XD2s is a bigger improvement over XD than XD was over 1st gen DP.

maltmoose said:

So on one hand i have no complaints in getting a nice sharp detailed image i now have to turn settings down so it doesnt look over sharpened!

This doesnt happen on every image though which is a bit frustrating so yea a mixed bag really.

I also find that vignette correction can be totally too strong on defaults on some camera lens combos. Not figured out why but might be because camera is baking in corrections in raw on some lenses..

Anyway, here is an image with default lens and vignette correction. Pretty obvious the vignette correction is wrong.


edges too bright from default vignette correction

2nd image i think is over sharpened using defaults. Its not the worst example, i have seen much, much worse but hard to go back and find them once processed.


Oversharp defaults?

I'm not hear to bash dxo, i can get great results but also some dubious results..

Click to expand...

--
Event professional for 20+ years, travel & landscape enthusiast for 30+, stills-only.
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos

Jacques Cornell said:

ishwanu said:

CAcreeks said:

... Versus Lightroom and Capture One is dramatic, but in practice an expert Lightroom user can achieve results comparable to DxO.

Click to expand...

I don't think those are well chosen DxO sharpening examples. They show distinct halos (dark or light) on many high contrast edges. The example of the guy on a mountaintop is really bad. I personally avoid taking sharpening that far with PhotoLab.

Photo AI did a better job working just from the RGB screen grab.


Screen grab of unsharpened original


Screen grab of DxO sharpening example


Unsharpened original sharpened with Photo AI instead

Click to expand...

Sharpening isn't PhotoLab's strength - for that there's Nik Sharpener

Click to expand...

PhotoLab's sharpening is capable of much better than what's seen in examples like the one above, posted in the article on the website. That's my point. I don't know how such examples got cleared. The development team must be cringing when they see them.

Jacques Cornell said:

- and in this case you're not working on RAW files.

Click to expand...

I had no RAW file to work on, but DxO's people probably did, and a mess was made of it anyway.

Jacques Cornell said:

For extracting max detail from RAW files, particularly noisy ones and ones shot with lenses that need help, PhotoLab/PureRAW still can't be beat.

Click to expand...

I'm certainly aware of how good DxO's sharpening can be. I repeat: That image, and some others posted in that article, fail to show how good it can be.

Jacques Cornell said:

maltmoose said:

Its interesting but with all the in-depth profiling i'm not convinced as photolab can often over sharpen the image with the defaults. This is often especially obvious with foliage. So im not 100% convinced what they do is really any better than other software that can often give more natural defaults.

I think part of the problem is that the lens sharpness defaults combined with the deepprime xd contributes to the over sharpness.

Click to expand...

You may be working with an older version. I found that the combination of Lens Sharpness with DeepPRIME XD tended to yield blotchy skin tones with PhotoLab 6 Elite. This was easy to ameliorate by simply dialing down the intensity of Lens Sharpness by 50% (Global: +0.50).

Click to expand...

Possibly that would be a good solution, but based on EXIF, the two examples that MaltMoose posted are from PhotoLab 8.3.1, which is 0.0.1 higher than the latest version on MacOS.

The 2nd image is somewhat convincing for oversharpness, although the 1st image definitely shows incorrect vignetting correction. Did you try reducing Lens Sharpness?

Jacques Cornell said:

Jacques Cornell said:

2nd image i think is over sharpened using defaults. Its not the worst example, i have seen much, much worse but hard to go back and find them once processed.


Oversharp defaults?

I'm not here to bash dxo, i can get great results but also some dubious results..

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I did not come to praise Caesar, but to bury him.

Jacques Cornell said:

maltmoose said:

Its interesting but with all the in-depth profiling i'm not convinced as photolab can often over sharpen the image with the defaults. This is often especially obvious with foliage. So im not 100% convinced what they do is really any better than other software that can often give more natural defaults.

I think part of the problem is that the lens sharpness defaults combined with the deepprime xd contributes to the over sharpness.

Click to expand...

You may be working with an older version. I found that the combination of Lens Sharpness with DeepPRIME XD tended to yield blotchy skin tones with PhotoLab 6 Elite. This was easy to ameliorate by simply dialing down the intensity of Lens Sharpness by 50% (Global: +0.50).

Click to expand...

Yes, im on latest version. I do reduce the sharpness but its not really much different than having to increase sharpness in some other tools, I can work round it but the vignette thing is annoying.

Jacques Cornell said:

But now, with DeepPRIME XD2s and the revamped Lens Sharpness engine in PhotoLab 8, the default results are fantastic. IMHO, DP XD2s is a bigger improvement over XD than XD was over 1st gen DP.

Click to expand...

Yes the xd2s is very good and an improvement over the older version.

Jacques Cornell said:

Jacques Cornell said:

So on one hand i have no complaints in getting a nice sharp detailed image i now have to turn settings down so it doesnt look over sharpened!

This doesnt happen on every image though which is a bit frustrating so yea a mixed bag really.

I also find that vignette correction can be totally too strong on defaults on some camera lens combos. Not figured out why but might be because camera is baking in corrections in raw on some lenses..

Anyway, here is an image with default lens and vignette correction. Pretty obvious the vignette correction is wrong.


edges too bright from default vignette correction

2nd image i think is over sharpened using defaults. Its not the worst example, i have seen much, much worse but hard to go back and find them once processed.


Oversharp defaults?

I'm not hear to bash dxo, i can get great results but also some dubious results..

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

maltmoose said:

Jacques Cornell said:

maltmoose said:

Its interesting but with all the in-depth profiling i'm not convinced as photolab can often over sharpen the image with the defaults. This is often especially obvious with foliage. So im not 100% convinced what they do is really any better than other software that can often give more natural defaults.

I think part of the problem is that the lens sharpness defaults combined with the deepprime xd contributes to the over sharpness.

Click to expand...

You may be working with an older version. I found that the combination of Lens Sharpness with DeepPRIME XD tended to yield blotchy skin tones with PhotoLab 6 Elite. This was easy to ameliorate by simply dialing down the intensity of Lens Sharpness by 50% (Global: +0.50).

Click to expand...

Yes, im on latest version. I do reduce the sharpness but its not really much different than having to increase sharpness in some other tools, I can work round it but the vignette thing is annoying.

maltmoose said:

But now, with DeepPRIME XD2s and the revamped Lens Sharpness engine in PhotoLab 8, the default results are fantastic. IMHO, DP XD2s is a bigger improvement over XD than XD was over 1st gen DP.

Click to expand...

Yes the xd2s is very good and an improvement over the older version.

Click to expand...

In the example images you provided, did you apply DeepPRIME XD or DeepPRIME XD2s? Earlier you indicated XD.

maltmoose said:

maltmoose said:

maltmoose said:

So on one hand i have no complaints in getting a nice sharp detailed image i now have to turn settings down so it doesnt look over sharpened!

This doesnt happen on every image though which is a bit frustrating so yea a mixed bag really.

I also find that vignette correction can be totally too strong on defaults on some camera lens combos. Not figured out why but might be because camera is baking in corrections in raw on some lenses..

Anyway, here is an image with default lens and vignette correction. Pretty obvious the vignette correction is wrong.


edges too bright from default vignette correction

2nd image i think is over sharpened using defaults. Its not the worst example, i have seen much, much worse but hard to go back and find them once processed.


Oversharp defaults?

I'm not hear to bash dxo, i can get great results but also some dubious results..

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Event professional for 20+ years, travel & landscape enthusiast for 30+, stills-only.

Jacques Cornell said:

maltmoose said:

Jacques Cornell said:

maltmoose said:

Its interesting but with all the in-depth profiling i'm not convinced as photolab can often over sharpen the image with the defaults. This is often especially obvious with foliage. So im not 100% convinced what they do is really any better than other software that can often give more natural defaults.

I think part of the problem is that the lens sharpness defaults combined with the deepprime xd contributes to the over sharpness.

Click to expand...

You may be working with an older version. I found that the combination of Lens Sharpness with DeepPRIME XD tended to yield blotchy skin tones with PhotoLab 6 Elite. This was easy to ameliorate by simply dialing down the intensity of Lens Sharpness by 50% (Global: +0.50).

Click to expand...

Yes, im on latest version. I do reduce the sharpness but its not really much different than having to increase sharpness in some other tools, I can work round it but the vignette thing is annoying.

Jacques Cornell said:

But now, with DeepPRIME XD2s and the revamped Lens Sharpness engine in PhotoLab 8, the default results are fantastic. IMHO, DP XD2s is a bigger improvement over XD than XD was over 1st gen DP.

Click to expand...

Yes the xd2s is very good and an improvement over the older version.

Click to expand...

In the example images you provided, did you apply DeepPRIME XD or DeepPRIME XD2s? Earlier you indicated XD.

Click to expand...

Sorry yes, i applied xd2s to both.

Jacques Cornell said:

Jacques Cornell said:

Jacques Cornell said:

Jacques Cornell said:

So on one hand i have no complaints in getting a nice sharp detailed image i now have to turn settings down so it doesnt look over sharpened!

This doesnt happen on every image though which is a bit frustrating so yea a mixed bag really.

I also find that vignette correction can be totally too strong on defaults on some camera lens combos. Not figured out why but might be because camera is baking in corrections in raw on some lenses..

Anyway, here is an image with default lens and vignette correction. Pretty obvious the vignette correction is wrong.


edges too bright from default vignette correction

2nd image i think is over sharpened using defaults. Its not the worst example, i have seen much, much worse but hard to go back and find them once processed.


Oversharp defaults?

I'm not hear to bash dxo, i can get great results but also some dubious results..

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Event professional for 20+ years, travel & landscape enthusiast for 30+, stills-only.
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos

Click to expand...